Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    October 28, 2012 9:30am-10:00am PDT

9:30 am
and having fun and taking things seriously, not about being blown away. >> what is real? it is a thing that happens to you when a child loves you for a long, long time. >> i think it is a success. for the most part if you are three to seven, you sit in the seats and most of the time the kids are engaged. they laugh and ask questions. i think that is success. the fact we tour it and do it here, it is lasting. i really want to say the reason it is lasting is because of the story marjorie williams wrote is a gem of a story. if it was just an okay story, it wouldn't have lasted this long.
9:31 am
i have had people say that is the first show i ever saw, that is why i am a choreographer. i have had people that have come back when they are 20 and 23 years old. little kids and people in their 50s and 60s are telling me how much they love it. they come back more than once, they come back year after year.. >> the meeting you will come it order. good afternoon, everyone, this is monday, october 23, 2012. this is the land use and economic development committee of the san francisco board of supervisors. my name is eric mar, chairman of the committee, to my right is melina cohen and
9:32 am
also david camp camp. miss miller. >> please be sure to turn off all electronic devices. documents to be included as part of the file should be submitted to the clerk. items acted upon today will appear on the october 23rd board of supervisors meeting unless otherwise stated. >> i want to thank our sfgtv staff for televising this today. we have 3 items on the agenda. we have had a request to move item 3 above item 2. is there any objection to that, colleagues? please call item 1. >> item 1. >> changes to the planning code, uses, signsing building
9:33 am
features, floor area ratio, parking and compliance in specified use districts. >> council member olague >> colleagues, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to be here. today i am respectfully asking the land use committee to split file no. 110548 for the purpose of making a minor change to the planning code in my district, specifically the ordinance that once it's split moves forward if you agree with our request, would amend section 231 of the planning code to awill you for greater size and depth from a corner for limited commercial uses in the rto mission
9:34 am
district. currently these uses are allowed to have a depth of 50 feet from the corner and a size of 1200 feet occupied square feet, my apologies. the ordinance that we would like to see go forward would amend these numbers to 100 feet and 2,500 feet, respectively. the reason that we are here is that this change was actually supposed to be made in an earlier version of the legislation which was actually the main reason that we had been co-sponsors of the original legislation but unbeknowns to us and without consultation with my office at the planning commission, there was a change that was made that actually took this piece out of the original legislation. and so this portion that was supposed to be included was
9:35 am
removed from the original legislation and that happened even though not only were we supporting this change but also supervisors president chiu, supervisors olague were actually in agreement with us and wapted to see this change be made. so i will now hope that you can support our request that you split the file and that you move out of committee this section of the legislation. once you split the file that makes the changes that are outlined before you. >> thank you, supervisor campos. if there are no questions, let's open this up for public comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to speak? and there is a limit of 3 minutes per person. there is a small buzzer or ding that goes off with 30 seconds to go.
9:36 am
>> so we need the microphone on. >> it's not on? >> there we go. this is my second time before this committee. i want to thank you for considering this new piece of legislation which actually it was a lot of questions why the mission district was left out from the legislation originally. i know it is very complex legislation and it has to be split in different ways, but, you know, they left the mission district out of it and i would like for you to consider this new addition to the legislation so we can move forward with a project that has been pending for about 8 years. in the meantime, some other businesses have grown out of the mission district and we are losing a lot of money at this point, not obl the money but also at the same time we have been 28 years in business, many
9:37 am
of the workers, which there are about 40 of them, have made a living out of this establishment. so i urge you in the name of the businesses as well as those people that have been working with us for a long time to move this piece forward so we can go ahead and start building. thank you very much. >> thank you. any other speakers? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleague, is there a motion to split the legislation? without objection we're spliting it. >> no objection. >> and then miss miller, so we vote separately on both of the items. which one do we vote on first? >> the original legislation. >> so for the original legislation, colleagues, can we move that forward without objection? great. and on the split --. >> mr. chair, the original legislation i believe is being continued and the divided
9:38 am
legislation is being recommended. >> so let's rescind -- we didn't vote on the first item, so is there any objection to continuing the first item to the call of the chair? i don't see where -- to the call of the chair. is there any objection to continuing it? seeing none. now a vote on the split item that's before us. can we move that forward without objection, colleagues? thank you. . >> thank you, colleagues, thank you, mr. chair. >> you're welcome, mr. campos. >> miss miller, item 3. >> item 3 is an item amending the san francisco administrative code by adding section 1.60 to require the mayor's office of housing and the planning department to report to the board of supervisors.
9:39 am
>> our president, mr. chiu. >> that has been trailing the trust fund amendment that we have placed on the november ballot. there were a number of policy that is we wanted to legislate in the wake of that particular charter amendment and this is one of them. should voters approve the trust fund measure when it goes to the ballot, we would like for this piece of legislation to go into effect and this was something that came out of discussions with the mayor's office on housing. given that the trust fund measure is going to be put into place policies that will last for the next 30 years, including a decrease in inclusionary housing requirements by 20 percent, as well as an increase in the inclusionary program from 5 to 10 units, i wanted to make sure the city was regularly evaluating the impact of these policies on affordable housing policies by requiring the planning department to rrt on
9:40 am
the policy by reporting to the board of supervisors every 5 years for the 30 years the legislation is in place. this would require the board to take legislative action should it be necessary to achieve our city's affordable housing goals in the future. we are some helpful changes that we have made and i wanted to give an opportunity to the mayor's office to make some initial comments and i understand they have also one additional change, but mr. olson lee, it's good to have you here. >> thank you very much, olson lee, director of the mayor's office of housing. the mayor's office of housing did have one modification to the modifications suggested by the planning commission, and that is to clarify the valuation of the programs, the housing trust fund, be based on different income categories
9:41 am
including those above 120. one of the programs of the housing trust fund is the first responders program, done payment assistance first responders, they are likely to be over 120 percent of median income and we want to be sure any evaluation captures that part of our program going forward. the income categories suggested by the planning department plus a category of over 120. >> and mr. chair, i should clarify, the changes that the mayor's office and housing have recommended is in the amended version that i just circulated to all of you here and i would ask the committee after public comment to adopt that and hopefully move it forward with recommendation. >> thank you, president chiu. if there are no questions, let's open this up for public comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. so, colleagues, can we adopt the amendments without
9:42 am
objection? thank you. and on the item itself, can we support this with a positive recommendation without objection is this thank you. thank you, president chiu. miss miller, please call item no. 2. >> item no. 2 is an ordinance amending the planning code to consolidate requirements for privately owned public space and (inaudible) bulletin for privately owned public open space. >> also sponsored by president chiu. >> thank you, colleagues, for consideration of our items today. as we all know san francisco includes the densist urban neighborhoods outside manhattan and we are always looking for ways to improve livability as well as open space. the legislation you have in front of you is to help ensure that all of our citizens have access to open spaces that are known as popos, privately owned public operate spaces. i know
9:43 am
there are -- this is sometimes thought of popos as slang for the police, but it is not that in this instance, these are privately owned public open spaces. popos under our planning code were required under the 19 85 downtown plan. for every 50 feet of office space, 1 square foot of public open space was required. we have over a dozen such spaces in plazas, roof top gardens, atriums, small parks, mostly in our downtown area and most of them are in my district, district 3. unfortunately, over the years, very few citizens know about the existence of popos because signage requirements have been extremely inadequate. i want to thank spur, john king of the san francisco chronicle as well as the planning department for their strong advocacy to ensure this legislation would help move forward better signage requirements and i also want to
9:44 am
thank supervisor wiener for his attention to this topic as well. we have a brief presentation from the planning department and i'd like to invite planning staff to make that presentation. >> good afternoon, chair mar and supervisors, kemia hadadar from the planning department. i'm going to go over the issues we found out through (inaudible) also our own trips to these spaces. there were multiple issues this legislation is trying to address. one is the size of these plaques. currently the code doesn't regulate the size so that made these signs to be in different sizes so, like, for example in this one we have a small like 6 by 10 inches sign plaque here, it's 55
9:45 am
second street. on 55 mission we have a slightly bigger one with lots of text in there, small font, and then empire park is a large sign with language in both chinese and english. the second issue was the information that's provided in these signage. currently the code regulates some of the content of the information in these signage and there is some good examples, like this one, the intercontinental hotel, it tells us where the space is because most of these issues are that the spaces are interior, they are accessed through a building rather than being outside so it's going to make it hard for the pedestrian, seated spaces without actually knowing they exist. this is another example
9:46 am
that provides some information. it's good but still doesn't address even the current requirements of the code that talks about what features there is, if there's seating, if there's a restroom in the space. so it doesn't talk about that. then this one, which is not a good example, is just a sign on a glass window and doesn't really provide any information on where the space is. another issue, the location and placement of the sign, for example, on this it's located on the surface on the ground, it's hard to see. this one is 101 second, it's actually a really nice space but this other door from second street doesn't even have a plaque so if someone's on second street they wouldn't know there's a space public here. then this one, the intercontinental hotel, the orient shows where the plaque
9:47 am
is and this is really far from the pedestrian walking by. this is kind of, like, inverted in entrance and people won't really see the plaque if they don't know there's a space over there. then last issue is the clarity, both the material of the plaques and also the contrast between the contents and the back grupbld. as you see, it's really difficult to see this sign that's engraved on a glass window. this one also is like silver color on a white surface, it's hard to see it. so the modifications that planning commission proposed are more regulations in terms of improving the sign and also applying it to existing popos that are not in compliance with existing requirements and then the other changes the planning
9:48 am
commission suggested was basically to consolidate the 3 different sections in the code that regulate these plaques to just make it easier to read and easier to understand. so we're going to, the planning commission has commended regarding size and fonts in a zoning bulletin that has, you know, all the contents. it would have goe logos for the features that's in there, hours, and then this would also be available in a digital format for project sponsors to get and just order the plaque. i have the plaque in the real
9:49 am
size here just to see how it looks like. it looks like this as an example. so that's basically all the modifications is just to make these spaces more visible and easier to find and make the public aware of the existence of these spaces. that concludes my presentation. >> thank you. i just wanted to mention two other things. we had introduced the initial version of this legislation that went to planning and i want to thank the planning staff for proposing some guidelines for existing popos, what we had stated was if there were new requirements, if there's a change of use for an existing popo, then the new requirements we have in this legislation will kick in. if there's existing signage that
9:50 am
dosment meet current code requirements, again the new requirements would kick in. there are some very small amendments that i have circulated to you. they are on page 14 of this legislation. i want to thank boma and the representatives of the building management world for feedback here. it was suggested we not require the email address of owners who were responsible for public access. right now the requirement is for a name, a telephone number and the postal address and we had email address as one of the requirements but i'm happy to suggest that we take that out. and then we were also, it was suggested to us by spur that the description on the informational plaque includes the type of open space, in other words, is it a plaza, is it an atrium, as well as the location of the open space and in cases where the space isn't visible from an open sidewalk, directions how to get to the open space and i think these
9:51 am
are all very good changes to the legislation. colleagues, i would ask after public comment if you can adopt this amendment and move this forward with recommendation to the full board. i want to take a moment to thank not just the planning department but spur had brought this to my attention and again john king who writes for the chronicle has been excellent at pointing out these secret spaces that should be made for public for all of us to enjoy. >> thank you, president chiu. i'm looking at the spur web site and the guide to san francisco popo, secrets of san francisco, but there's a lot of good information from sf fist and spur online. if there are no further questions, let's open this up to the public. anyone like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed.
9:52 am
supervisor wiener. >> thank you, mr. chairman, i just want to thank president chiu for taking leadership on this and addressing something that should have been addressed, frankly, a long time ago. we know that a public space is not just a traditional open space like parks, they are in a densely populated 7 by 7 urban environment like san francisco. we need to take advantage of public spaces wherever they are and they take all sorts of different shapes and forms and popos are certainly an important part of that mix. so i just wanted to express my thanks to president chiu for moving us forward and i move that we forward it with a positive recommendation to the board. i also adopt the amendment. >> i also really appreciate the increase of awareness of these public open spaces from redwood park in the shadow of
9:53 am
the transamerica pyramid to the incedible roof sun terraces at the crocker galleria. i see no other comments. can we adopt these amendments without objection, colleagues? thank you. and on the ordinance itself, can we support this with a positive recommendation without objection? thank you. thank you. thank you, president chiu. miss miller, is there any other business before us. >> no, there are no further matters. >> great, meeting adjourned. thank you, everyone. (meeting adjourned).
9:54 am
>> i tried to think about this room as the dream room, where we dream and bring some of those dreams to life. i feel very blessed that i have been able to spend the last 31 years of my life doing it my way, thinking about things better interesting to me, and then pursuing them. there are a lot of different artists that come here to work, mostly doing aerial work. kindred spirits, so to speak. there is a circus company that i have been fortunate enough to work with the last couple of years. i use elements of dance and choreography and combine that with theater techniques. a lot of the work is content- based, has a strong narrative.
9:55 am
the dancers have more of a theatrical feel. i think we are best known for our specific work. in the last 15 years, spending a lot of time focusing on issues that affect us and are related to the african-american experience, here in the united states. i had heard of marcus shelby and had been in join his work but never had the opportunity to meet him. we were brought together by the equal justice society specifically for this project. we were charged with beginning work. marquez and i spent a lot of time addressing our own position on the death penalty, our experiences with people who
9:56 am
had been incarcerated, family members, friends of friends. pulling our information. beyond that, we did our own research. to create a picture that resonated with humanity. it is the shape of a house. in this context, it is also small and acts like a cell. i thought that was an interesting play on how these people make these adjustments, half to create home. what is home for these people? the home is their cell. people talk a lot about noise -- very noisy in prisons. that is interesting to me. looking at the communication
9:57 am
level, the rise of frustration of being caged, wondering, where does redemption fit into the equation here? [singing] i think both of us really believe the death penalty is wrong, and is flawed for many reasons. the list is as long as my arm -- about several others. we feel this is important for both of us, personally, to participate in the debate of this issue in a way that we can
9:58 am
help people frame it for a conversation. >> we came to seven straight about 10 years ago. -- 7th street about 10 years ago. the environment is huge. it is stronger than willpower. surrounding yourself with artists, being in a culture where artists are driving, and where a huge amount of them is a healthy environment.
9:59 am
>> you are making it safer. push, push. that is better. when i start thinking, i see it actually -- sometimes, i do not see it, but when i do, it is usually from the inside out. it is like watching something being spawned. you go in, and you begin to work, excavate, play with the dancers, and then things began to emerge. you may have a plan that this is what i want to create. here are the ideas i want to play with, but then, you go into the room, and there maybe some fertile ideas that are becoming manifest that are more interesting than the idea you had initially set out to plan. so there has to be this openness for spontaneity.